Global Arena Capital

Broker Investigation: Claims Against Broker Glen Delaney

October 31, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker Glen Delaney (Delaney) has been the subject of at least 2 customer complaints and 3 judgements or liens. Customers have filed complaints against Delaney alleging securities law violations including unauthorized trades, breach of fiduciary duty, and unsuitable investments among other claims. In addition, Delaney has had difficulty managing his own finances and on August 13, 2015, disclosed a civil judgment of $50,225, on November 19, 2010, disclosed a civil judgement of $9,720, and in 2006 had a civil judgement of $600. Judgements are often a sign that the broker cannot manage their own personal finances and may be tempted to recommend high commission products or strategies to clients in order to satisfy debts.

Delaney entered the securities industry in 2005. Since 2008 Delaney has been registered with Pointe Capital, Inc., until June 2009. From June 2009, until October 2010, Delaney was registered with Global Arena Capital Corp. Thereafter, from October 2010, until April 2012, Delaney was associated with Brookstone Securities, Inc. From April 2012, until June 2015, Delaney was a registered representative of Rockwell Global Capital LLC. From June 2015, until August 2015, Delaney was registered with Primary Capital, LLC. Finally, since August 2015, Delaney has been associated with Craig Scott Capital, LLC out of the firm’s Uniondale, New York office location.

All advisers have a fundamental responsibility to deal fairly with investors including making suitable investment recommendations. In order to make suitable recommendations the broker must have a reasonable basis for recommending the product or security based upon the broker’s investigation of the investments properties including its benefits, risks, tax consequences, and other relevant factors. In addition, the broker must also understand the customer’s specific investment objectives to determine whether or not the specific product or security being recommended is appropriate for the customer based upon their needs.

FINRA Sanctions Five Brokers Affiliated with HFP Capital Markets

September 3, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned five brokers formerly associated with now expelled brokerage firm HFP Capital Markets LLC (HFP Capital) (Case No. 2010024522103) including brokers Jonah Engler (Engler), Brett Friedberg (Friedberg), Jonathan Sheklow (Sheklow), Joshua Turney (Turney), and Hector Perez (a/k/a Bruce Johnson) (Perez) concerning allegations that between December 2009, and February 2011, the five brokers fraudulently sold a total of nearly $3 million worth of Senior Secured Zero Coupon Notes (MMM Notes) issued by Metals, Milling and Mining LLC in a private placement offering to 59 customers.

FINRA alleged that the brokers misrepresented material facts about the offering by promising to pay a return of 100 percent in one year by purportedly extracting precious metals from materials left over from mining operations. In reality, FINRA determined that the investors lost all of the money that they invested in the MMM Notes, with the exception of three investors who were repaid with funds from new investors in a Ponzi scheme like fashion. FINRA determined that the brokers also recklessly failed to conduct a reasonable investigation, or due diligence, of the viability and legitimacy of company in the face of numerous red flags that it was a fraud.

In addition, FINRA alleged that the brokers recklessly misrepresented to customers that: (a) the MMM Notes were collateralized by certain barrels of ore concentrate; and (b) the collateral ore concentrate was of sufficient value to secure the investment in the MMM Notes. In fact, FINRA found that there was no collateral for the MMM Notes because the company did not own any ore concentrate. FINRA determined that the broker’s representations concerning the MMM Notes were recklessly and misrepresented material facts regarding the MMM Notes in willful violation of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 (the anti-fraud provision) as well as several industry rules. In sum, the brokers failed to obtain even basic information about the company necessary to the due diligence process in order to understand an investment in the company and therefore lacked a reasonable basis to recommend the MMM Notes to investors.

Broker Spotlight: Alexander Capital Broker Anthony Pace

July 29, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker Anthony Pace (Pace) has been the subject of at least six customer complaints and one employment seperation. The customer complaint against Pace allege a number of securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments, engaged in churning (excessive trading), misrepresentations, negligence, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and failure to execute among other claims.

Pace entered the securities industry in 1994. From 2005 through May 2009, Pace was associated with J.P. Turner & Company, L.L.C. (JP Turner). Thereafter from May 2009, until September 2010, Pace was registered with vFinance Investments, Inc. From there, Pace was associated with Global Arena Capital Corp from September 2010, through April 2015. Finally, Pace became associated with Alexander Capital, L.P. in March 2015.

Pace’s employment separation involved allegations by Global Arena Capital claiming that Pace allowed client information to be taken from the office by another person. The information was later returned to the firm.

Gana LLP Investigation: Broker James Connors

July 28, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

According to the BrokerCheck records kept by Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) broker James Connors (Connors) has been the subject of at least two customer complaints. The customer complaints against Connors allege a number of securities law violations including that the broker made unsuitable investments and engaged in churning (excessive trading) among other claims.

Connors entered the securities industry in 1995. From August 2006 through October 2009, Connors was associated with J.P. Turner & Company, L.L.C. (JP Turner). Thereafter from October 2009, until November 2010, Connors was registered with Brookstone Securities, Inc. Brookstone Securities was thereafter expelled from the industry by FINRA. From there, Connors was associated with Meyers Associates, L.P. Finally, Connors became associated with First Standard Financial Company LLC.

Some of these firms Connors has been associated with have been known to house troublesome brokers. For instance, Meyers Associates has an unusually high number of brokers with complaints on their records. According to FINRA, approximately twelve percent of registered representatives have some form of disclosure on their record. However, as we have previously reported, forty seven out of seventy five, or nearly sixty-three percent of the brokers employed by Meyers Associates, have a marked-up history as revealed by BrokerCheck. Even more disturbing is the fact that of those forty seven brokers have on average of 4.5 disclosure events per broker.

Global Arena Capital Broker Nick Morrisey Suspended By FINRA

June 9, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

According the BrokerCheck records kept by The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) the agency suspended former Global Arena Capital Corp (Global Arena) broker Niaz Elmazi a/k/a Nick Morrisey (Morrisey) concerning allegations that Morrisey failed to respond to FINRA’s requests for information.

Morrisey has a history of regulatory complaints and also has one customer complaint on his record. In 2013, the state of Arkansas brought action against Morrisey alleging that in July 2012, Morrisey contacted an Arkansas resident via a cold call in order to recommend the purchase of a corporate bond issued by Verso Paper Corp (Verso). However, Morrisey was unaware that the Arkansas resident was actually employed as a senior securities examiner with the Arkansas securities department and that he had contacted the examiner on an office phone during business hours. During the conversation it was alleged by Arkansas that Morrisey made untrue and false statements when recommending the Verso bond. In addition, Arkansas alleged that Morrisey had no reasonable grounds for believing that the recommendation was suitable for the investor prior to making the recommendation.

All advisers have a fundamental responsibility to deal fairly with investors including making suitable investment recommendations. In order to make suitable recommendations the broker must have a reasonable basis for recommending the product or security based upon the broker’s investigation of the investments properties including its benefits, risks, tax consequences, and other relevant factors. In addition, the broker must also understand the customer’s specific investment objectives to determine whether or not the specific product or security being recommended is appropriate for the customer based upon their needs.

Broker Spotlight – Mark Lisser Accused of Churning by at Least Three Customers

August 27, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The law office of Gana Weinstein LLP is investigating a string of securities arbitration cases involving broker Mark Lisser (Lisser) which generally allege securities violations including churning, excessive use of margin, churning, unsuitable investments, and breach of fiduciary duty. All the cases have been filed before The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA).

Lisser was registered with Prestige Financial Center, Inc. from February 2008, until November 2010. Thereafter, he was an associated person with Global Arena Capital Corp.

As a background “churning” occurs in a securities account when a dealer or broker, acting in his own interests and against those of his customer, induces transactions in the customer’s account that are excessive in size and frequency in light of the character of the account. In order to show that churning took place a claimant must demonstrate that the broker-dealer exercised control over the account and that the broker engaged in excessive trading considering the objectives and nature of the account.